cp40 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers. While Keegan certainly achieved a lot during his first spell here, Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. where were you 92-97 , old type? is it relevant? read the bit in bold - you'll no doubt not have a fuckin clue what it means up yours mr majorspasm, if you say things like....not fit to lace his boots, your not being objective. too many people on here, have opinions, and spouting off about things they never saw. i didn't say it mate, but i saw most of what keegan did and achieved in his first period (home & away) so don't give me that shite how much did you see of robson when he was winning shit all over europe then, seeing as you're talking about opinions and objectivity? i never said , it was your point, you jumped in , when i was questioning old types opinions,.. if you dont want me to reply, then why did you butt in, didn't say i didn't want you to reply - i want you to be able to argue and reason like an adult, but you can't EDIT: and it seemed to me were actually gonna question his attendance rather than his opinion, am i wrong? Question if his Keegan opinions weer based on wehat he saw, an adult point in my opinion, you then acted without reason, and not adult like when you said i wouldnt have a fucking clue about the bit in bold. Read it back you fool, it was you that, started the mud slinging here, i simply obliged by lowering myself a long way down to your level. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers. While Keegan certainly achieved a lot during his first spell here, Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. where were you 92-97 , old type? is it relevant? read the bit in bold - you'll no doubt not have a fuckin clue what it means up yours mr majorspasm, if you say things like....not fit to lace his boots, your not being objective. too many people on here, have opinions, and spouting off about things they never saw. i didn't say it mate, but i saw most of what keegan did and achieved in his first period (home & away) so don't give me that shite how much did you see of robson when he was winning shit all over europe then, seeing as you're talking about opinions and objectivity? i never said , it was your point, you jumped in , when i was questioning old types opinions,.. if you dont want me to reply, then why did you butt in, didn't say i didn't want you to reply - i want you to be able to argue and reason like an adult, but you can't EDIT: and it seemed to me were actually gonna question his attendance rather than his opinion, am i wrong? Question if his Keegan opinions weer based on wehat he saw, an adult point in my opinion, you then acted without reason, and not adult like when you said i wouldnt have a fucking clue about the bit in bold. Read it back you fool, it was you that, started the mud slinging here, i simply obliged by lowering myself a long way down to your level. what a shit post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I still can't believe people are using SBR to get at Keegan. Well actually I can, that's the sad thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers. While Keegan certainly achieved a lot during his first spell here, Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. where were you 92-97 , old type? is it relevant? read the bit in bold - you'll no doubt not have a fuckin clue what it means up yours mr majorspasm, if you say things like....not fit to lace his boots, your not being objective. too many people on here, have opinions, and spouting off about things they never saw. i didn't say it mate, but i saw most of what keegan did and achieved in his first period (home & away) so don't give me that shite how much did you see of robson when he was winning shit all over europe then, seeing as you're talking about opinions and objectivity? i never said , it was your point, you jumped in , when i was questioning old types opinions,.. if you dont want me to reply, then why did you butt in, didn't say i didn't want you to reply - i want you to be able to argue and reason like an adult, but you can't EDIT: and it seemed to me were actually gonna question his attendance rather than his opinion, am i wrong? Question if his Keegan opinions weer based on wehat he saw, an adult point in my opinion, you then acted without reason, and not adult like when you said i wouldnt have a fucking clue about the bit in bold. Read it back you fool, it was you that, started the mud slinging here, i simply obliged by lowering myself a long way down to your level. what a shit post he's had better Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know all about shit posts Libertine, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I still can't believe people are using SBR to get at Keegan. Well actually I can, that's the sad thing. why is it getting at him by comparing 2 managers....he's not fuckin jesus or moha**** you know? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 What a fucking pointless argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Libertine Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You know all about shit posts Libertine, such a baby. hardly surprising you defend keegan so much.... ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I still can't believe people are using SBR to get at Keegan. Well actually I can, that's the sad thing. why is it getting at him by comparing 2 managers....he's not fuckin jesus or moha**** you know? No, what I mean is we all know SBR has proven to be the better manager over his career, much like we all know Keegan's first spell was better than SBR's time in charge (Not knocking that btw as it was fantastic during some of it). But people are using SBR to belittle what Keegan acheived during his time here in his first spell in charge. Saying it was insignificant to what Robson acheived, well yes it was in someways, but ask anyone who experienced those times and they won't tell you it was such an 'insignificant' period. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howaythetoon Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 When the going gets tough Keegan gets going unfortunately. That's just the way he is. He was at Newcastle and Man City for 10 years collectively where he faced many tough times, especially in his earlier days at St. James' Park where for a while he was paying Terry Mac out of his own pockets that's how tough things were. Its a myth that KK walks when the going gets tough as his stints at SJP and Man City especially prove. When he left Newcastle back in '97 we were 2nd in the League, still in the FA Cup and had just beaten Spurs 7-1 - yeah, that was a tough old time. He had actually agreed to stay on at Man City until the end of the season but their board felt it would be better if he went sooner so he did. At Fulham he was head hunted by the FA and had the nation begging for him to say yes to the England job which Fulham dully allowed him to take. He has only ever walked away from a job in tough circumstances twice, England and recently Newcastle. In both instances however he had/has good justification for "walking" especially if the latter "tough going" meant being undermined. Of course KK has used the "I quit" card a few times without actually walking which many could say paints him out to be a bit of a drama queen. I won't hold that against him however as it probably saved our club the first time he used it. All I know is that when he was here in the 90s he put everything and more into the challenge of first saving this club and then turning into genuine title challenges. Some of the things he did for this club as manager went beyond the call of employee or manager, like paying Terry Macs wages out of his own pockets, like supplying academy lads with new kit and boots, like fixing up players with boot deals to boost their earnings without eating into club coffers, like threating to quit to get the 50K he was promised by SJH in order to buy that leader for the back that would help us stay up, like lying to Rob Lee that London was closer from Newcastle than Middlesbrough, like lying to SJH that sunderland would snap up Beardsley if we didn't and that he was 30 and not 32, like coming onto the steps of SJP to talk to fans, like opening up training to thousands of fans every day and so much more to the point it clearly took its toll on his mental health. I mean he turned grey over night He has/had his faults of course, he can be far too emotional and petulant, his mood swings are legendary too and yes he can just quit like that on an emotional whim or whatever as he did with England. In September however I believe he was being undermined and therefore well within his rights to walk, not many managers would put up with such things. It pains me to read the character and history assassination of the man by so-called fans on here though it really does. I love the man but I am aware he has his faults and yes he wasn't the greatest of managers in terms of all-round ability but he has been our best manager in modern history and by some margin, his record and feats here prove that. Its sad that some are prepared to jump all over that to point score, put the man down or to make others look better. Judge people independently. You can defend Ashley without putting KK down. You can defend KK without putting Ashley down. Now that months have past I won't lie, I am disappointed with KK in some respects and do think he himself isn't blameless in all of this, however I know the man and know what he's like, I accepted him for what he is a long time ago so I'm not going to criticise him now or get angry over it. If anything it just highlights the folly in hiring such a man, not the folly in KK himself, and indeed how much NUFC has changed since they were last a union where as KK really hasn't. In a way that's a great shame because while NUFC has changed, the core culture of the club hasn't and probably never will and there is no man more qualified to marry that culture if you will than KK. But he's history now and we all need to move on regardless of where you sit on all of this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers. While Keegan certainly achieved a lot during his first spell here, Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. where were you 92-97 , old type? is it relevant? read the bit in bold - you'll no doubt not have a fuckin clue what it means up yours mr majorspasm, if you say things like....not fit to lace his boots, your not being objective. too many people on here, have opinions, and spouting off about things they never saw. i didn't say it mate, but i saw most of what keegan did and achieved in his first period (home & away) so don't give me that shite how much did you see of robson when he was winning shit all over europe then, seeing as you're talking about opinions and objectivity? i never said , it was your point, you jumped in , when i was questioning old types opinions,.. if you dont want me to reply, then why did you butt in, didn't say i didn't want you to reply - i want you to be able to argue and reason like an adult, but you can't EDIT: and it seemed to me were actually gonna question his attendance rather than his opinion, am i wrong? Question if his Keegan opinions weer based on wehat he saw, an adult point in my opinion, you then acted without reason, and not adult like when you said i wouldnt have a fucking clue about the bit in bold. Read it back you fool, it was you that, started the mud slinging here, i simply obliged by lowering myself a long way down to your level. cp40, i'm gonna keep trying: oldtype's point was that robson achieved success across europe and won things everywhere he went managing barcelona no less and winning 3 cups with them in one season keegan had 5 great years, was rightly lauded in european & world football for the quality of the game we played and he won no prizes except the first division title an objective view can only judge one of them a better manager than the other, a subjective view (which i've really no problem with as long as you're aware that that's what it is) might see someone thinking keegan was better because of the great times they had watching his team play and the effect the man had on our club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I dont know, how many times ive said this, but i will explain further. It dosent get to me comparing the two managers, both brilliant, the two best ive known since my first match in 1971. Keegan just edges if for me, simple. though i accept people can argue for Robson, i dont mind, I loved him, there is little between ther 2 for me. edit, and i do accept Robson achieved more elsewhere, and turned us down during that time. What does bother me, it appears on here, the people who werent around during and before( in the 2nd division), Keegans spells here as a player and manager slag him off. The people who were around in them second division days, and Keegans spell, generally appreciate him. With a few exceptions. This is the way it goes on here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I dont know, how many times ive said this, but i will explain further. It dosent get to me comparing the two managers, both brilliant, the two best ive known since my first match in 1971. Keegan just edges if for me, simple. though i accept people can argue for Robson, i dont mind, I loved him, there is little between ther 2 for me. edit, and i do accept Robson achieved more elsewhere, and turned us down during that time. What does bother me, it appears on here, the people who werent around during and before( in the 2nd division), Keegans spells here as a player and manager slag him off. The people who were around in them second division days, and Keegans spell, generally appreciate him. With a few exceptions. This is the way it goes on here. goalposts shifted then, but i don't disagree with much of what you say in this post for a change i was around starting in the promotion season (when i was 16) and have great affection for the bloke, but i also recognise the failures he has as a manager and a person Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I dont know, how many times ive said this, but i will explain further. It dosent get to me comparing the two managers, both brilliant, the two best ive known since my first match in 1971. Keegan just edges if for me, simple. though i accept people can argue for Robson, i dont mind, I loved him, there is little between ther 2 for me. edit, and i do accept Robson achieved more elsewhere, and turned us down during that time. What does bother me, it appears on here, the people who werent around during and before( in the 2nd division), Keegans spells here as a player and manager slag him off. The people who were around in them second division days, and Keegans spell, generally appreciate him. With a few exceptions. This is the way it goes on here. goalposts shifted then, but i don't disagree with much of what you say in this post for a change i was around starting in the promotion season (when i was 16) and have great affection for the bloke, but i also recognise the failures he has as a manager and a person can you point out where i shifted the goalposts? i am certain on my thoughts on this matter, and dont change them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I still can't believe people are using SBR to get at Keegan. Well actually I can, that's the sad thing. why is it getting at him by comparing 2 managers....he's not fuckin jesus or moha**** you know? No, what I mean is we all know SBR has proven to be the better manager over his career, much like we all know Keegan's first spell was better than SBR's time in charge (Not knocking that btw as it was fantastic during some of it). But people are using SBR to belittle what Keegan acheived during his time here in his first spell in charge. Saying it was insignificant to what Robson acheived, well yes it was in someways, but ask anyone who experienced those times and they won't tell you it was such an 'insignificant' period. people who dismiss what keegan did as insignificant are patently fucktards, almost not an exaggeration to say he was instrumental in the rejuvenation of a city Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRL Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 When the going gets tough Keegan gets going unfortunately. That's just the way he is. He was at Newcastle and Man City for 10 years collectively where he faced many tough times, especially in his earlier days at St. James' Park where for a while he was paying Terry Mac out of his own pockets that's how tough things were. Its a myth that KK walks when the going gets tough as his stints at SJP and Man City especially prove. When he left Newcastle back in '97 we were 2nd in the League, still in the FA Cup and had just beaten Spurs 7-1 - yeah, that was a tough old time. He had actually agreed to stay on at Man City until the end of the season but their board felt it would be better if he went sooner so he did. At Fulham he was head hunted by the FA and had the nation begging for him to say yes to the England job which Fulham dully allowed him to take. He has only ever walked away from a job in tough circumstances twice, England and recently Newcastle. In both instances however he had/has good justification for "walking" especially if the latter "tough going" meant being undermined. Of course KK has used the "I quit" card a few times without actually walking which many could say paints him out to be a bit of a drama queen. I won't hold that against him however as it probably saved our club the first time he used it. All I know is that when he was here in the 90s he put everything and more into the challenge of first saving this club and then turning into genuine title challenges. Some of the things he did for this club as manager went beyond the call of employee or manager, like paying Terry Macs wages out of his own pockets, like supplying academy lads with new kit and boots, like fixing up players with boot deals to boost their earnings without eating into club coffers, like threating to quit to get the 50K he was promised by SJH in order to buy that leader for the back that would help us stay up, like lying to Rob Lee that London was closer from Newcastle than Middlesbrough, like lying to SJH that sunderland would snap up Beardsley if we didn't and that he was 30 and not 32, like coming onto the steps of SJP to talk to fans, like opening up training to thousands of fans every day and so much more to the point it clearly took its toll on his mental health. I mean he turned grey over night He has/had his faults of course, he can be far too emotional and petulant, his mood swings are legendary too and yes he can just quit like that on an emotional whim or whatever as he did with England. In September however I believe he was being undermined and therefore well within his rights to walk, not many managers would put up with such things. It pains me to read the character and history assassination of the man by so-called fans on here though it really does. I love the man but I am aware he has his faults and yes he wasn't the greatest of managers in terms of all-round ability but he has been our best manager in modern history and by some margin, his record and feats here prove that. Its sad that some are prepared to jump all over that to point score, put the man down or to make others look better. Judge people independently. You can defend Ashley without putting KK down. You can defend KK without putting Ashley down. Now that months have past I won't lie, I am disappointed with KK in some respects and do think he himself isn't blameless in all of this, however I know the man and know what he's like, I accepted him for what he is a long time ago so I'm not going to criticise him now or get angry over it. If anything it just highlights the folly in hiring such a man, not the folly in KK himself, and indeed how much NUFC has changed since they were last a union where as KK really hasn't. In a way that's a great shame because while NUFC has changed, the core culture of the club hasn't and probably never will and there is no man more qualified to marry that culture if you will than KK. But he's history now and we all need to move on regardless of where you sit on all of this. You do get some grief on here for some of the posts you make, but the above is, in my view, a great post... Sums up how i feel completely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 <b>In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers.</b> Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. And just as objectively you'd have to agree that Phil Neville was a far better footballer than Shearer. Using the competitions won by managers managing different teams, in different leagues, with different financial clout, at different times is far from as objective a way of measuring as may seem. Apart from with us Keegan has never managed a team which has anywhere near the resources necessary to win the big stuff. He's always taken on teams which were a challenge and needed turning around, and as such he got each of the teams he managed promoted as champions the first full year he was in charge (I think). He very nearly won us the league 3 and a half years after almost being relegated from the second division. Are those lesser achievements than winning the Dutch league with PSV, or a cup with Barcelona? Well, objectively, yes they are, but for me I'd rather have Keegan as manager than Robson because given the same resources I think he'd win out quite easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 And just as objectively you'd have to agree that Phil Neville was a far better footballer than Shearer. Strange analogy. You can't compare a player to a manager like that, a manager has so much more influence over the team doing well or the team failing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 <b>In the end the proper criteria for judging a manager's ability is not made-up subjective categories but what they have achieved during their careers.</b> Sir Bobby's managerial CV is one of the most illustrious in the history of the game. "Keegan at NUFC" may have achieved more than "Sir Bobby at NUFC," but objectively, Kevin Keegan as a manger isn't fit to lace Sir Bobby Robson's boots. And just as objectively you'd have to agree that Phil Neville was a far better footballer than Shearer. Using the competitions won by managers managing different teams, in different leagues, with different financial clout, at different times is far from as objective a way of measuring as may seem. Apart from with us Keegan has never managed a team which has anywhere near the resources necessary to win the big stuff. He's always taken on teams which were a challenge and needed turning around, and as such he got each of the teams he managed promoted as champions the first full year he was in charge (I think). He very nearly won us the league 3 and a half years after almost being relegated from the second division. Are those lesser achievements than winning the Dutch league with PSV, or a cup with Barcelona? Well, objectively, yes they are, but for me I'd rather have Keegan as manager than Robson because given the same resources I think he'd win out quite easily. think you'd have to go back and look at what each club was like when robson took it over, i.e. were PSV strong when he started doing well or was he there during a good ajax period, did he inherit or build the team...were barca on top when he went or real (given that real won the league in his only season it's arguable perhaps) and same for the portugal stint and so on and so forth then do the same for keegan...to do him down a little we were title challengers to man u in one (1.25 maybe) season under him at a rare time when liverpool and arsenal were dogshit and chelski didn't exist, there was man u and us for a little while as blackburn had already started to implode and no-one else was worth anything at that time i'm not slating his achievements at all but if you're gonna bring context into play it works both ways Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I dont know, how many times ive said this, but i will explain further. It dosent get to me comparing the two managers, both brilliant, the two best ive known since my first match in 1971. Keegan just edges if for me, simple. though i accept people can argue for Robson, i dont mind, I loved him, there is little between ther 2 for me. edit, and i do accept Robson achieved more elsewhere, and turned us down during that time. What does bother me, it appears on here, the people who werent around during and before( in the 2nd division), Keegans spells here as a player and manager slag him off. The people who were around in them second division days, and Keegans spell, generally appreciate him. With a few exceptions. This is the way it goes on here. Absolutely everyone appreciates him. Does that make him exempt from criticism? No. One can criticise him and still appreciate him for everything positive he's done. He's not perfect. He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Absolutely everyone appreciates him. Does that make him exempt from criticism? No. One can criticise him and still appreciate them for everything positive he's done. He's not perfect. He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy. tried explaining this to cp40 before, doesn't work Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 And just as objectively you'd have to agree that Phil Neville was a far better footballer than Shearer. Strange analogy. You can't compare a player to a manager like that, a manager has so much more influence over the team doing well or the team failing. A manager may have more influence over the team than a player (although in extreme cases, like Chelsea for example, they could win stuff with almost anyone in charge simply because they have far superior squad to most teams), but his abilities as a manager have nowhere near as much influence as the stature of the club and the amount of money he has available compared to his rivals. The point being that a player or a manager's medal tally has far more to do with the teams they are with than their own individual ability. Of course their ability determines whether or not they are wanted by the top teams, but not all top players/managers chose that path. If Wenger, Ferguson or Mourinho had managed Fulham or Man City would they have been winning cups and leagues? I doubt it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You do get some grief on here for some of the posts you make, but the above is, in my view, a great post... Sums up how i feel completely. Agreed. Great post HTT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen927 Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1131584/King-Kev-Town-Keegan-invited-join-coaching-staff-Huddersfield.html?ITO=1490 Been invited to join Huddersfield to coach on a part time basis apparently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 They've already denied that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts